Portugal is about to make a huge step towards moral sensibility by legalizing gay marriage. Of course, not everyone is happy about this step towards progress. In particular, these legal actions are being opposed by the Catholic Church - that misogynistic, homophobic, sadistic, xenophobic, jingoistic, sectarian, languorous child raping engine of bigotry and ignorance that dares to presume moral enlightenment.

Further, the Pope doesn't seem to be very happy either. In particular, he urged Portugal to return to its 'Christian values' saying, "the attempt to find truth outside of Jesus Christ is dramatic." One wonders, how can anyone looking at this situation think of the Pope's words to be anything other than the hollow musings of a senile old bat?

At 5/12/2010 9:45:18 PM, Freeman wrote:In particular, these legal actions are being opposed by the Catholic Church - that misogynistic, homophobic, sadistic, xenophobic, jingoistic, sectarian, languorous child raping engine of bigotry and ignorance that dares to presume moral enlightenment.

Shhhh! Don't say that! My Catholic friend could be reading this... Ok, she's not, but good move on Portugal's part. Probably much to the surprise of many people I am pro-gay marriage.

How do you reconcile that with Islam?

I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.

Portugal is about to make a huge step towards moral sensibility by legalizing gay marriage. Of course, not everyone is happy about this step towards progress. In particular, these legal actions are being opposed by the Catholic Church - that misogynistic, homophobic, sadistic, xenophobic, jingoistic, sectarian, languorous child raping engine of bigotry and ignorance that dares to presume moral enlightenment.

Further, the Pope doesn't seem to be very happy either. In particular, he urged Portugal to return to its 'Christian values' saying, "the attempt to find truth outside of Jesus Christ is dramatic." One wonders, how can anyone looking at this situation think of the Pope's words to be anything other than the hollow musings of a senile old bat?

I have a lot of mixed feelings on this topic. I am gay, a libertarian and a Catholic. I am in favor of gay marriage at the state level, but what confuses me on your post is the morality that is being spoken of in the matter of the state's decision. Do you believe that the state must take the position that marriage is an arrangement based on morality or a legal contract? If it is more than a legal contract then what? If it is more than a legal contract and endeavors into the realm of morality does the state then take the role that the church has had in this area? Should not the state simply preside over the legality of such a contract instead of making a line of morality in the sand?

Portugal is about to make a huge step towards moral sensibility by legalizing gay marriage. Of course, not everyone is happy about this step towards progress. In particular, these legal actions are being opposed by the Catholic Church - that misogynistic, homophobic, sadistic, xenophobic, jingoistic, sectarian, languorous child raping engine of bigotry and ignorance that dares to presume moral enlightenment.

Further, the Pope doesn't seem to be very happy either. In particular, he urged Portugal to return to its 'Christian values' saying, "the attempt to find truth outside of Jesus Christ is dramatic." One wonders, how can anyone looking at this situation think of the Pope's words to be anything other than the hollow musings of a senile old bat?

I have a lot of mixed feelings on this topic. I am gay, a libertarian and a Catholic. I am in favor of gay marriage at the state level, but what confuses me on your post is the morality that is being spoken of in the matter of the state's decision. Do you believe that the state must take the position that marriage is an arrangement based on morality or a legal contract? If it is more than a legal contract then what? If it is more than a legal contract and endeavors into the realm of morality does the state then take the role that the church has had in this area? Should not the state simply preside over the legality of such a contract instead of making a line of morality in the sand?

It's not really a contract either. Certainly not in the traditional sense of the meaning. If you mean should married partners have a contractual basis for certain circumstances such as inheritance etc., and for the state to recognise that, then that is slightly different.

Good for Portugal for legalizing what the majority wanted. (Or did the government just pass it?) In the states, I support states voting for it, but I don't support legalizing it across the nation all at once.

At 5/12/2010 9:45:18 PM, Freeman wrote:In particular, these legal actions are being opposed by the Catholic Church - that misogynistic, homophobic, sadistic, xenophobic, jingoistic, sectarian, languorous child raping engine of bigotry and ignorance that dares to presume moral enlightenment.

Shhhh! Don't say that! My Catholic friend could be reading this... Ok, she's not, but good move on Portugal's part. Probably much to the surprise of many people I am pro-gay marriage.

How do you reconcile that with Islam?

Separation of church and state. :) Theocracies = big problem.

That is a difficult position to take, especially within Islam. You deserve a round of applause.

I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.

At 5/13/2010 6:10:00 AM, Nubway wrote:Good for Portugal for legalizing what the majority wanted. (Or did the government just pass it?) In the states, I support states voting for it, but I don't support legalizing it across the nation all at once.

Why not? Legalising it in some states and not others creates absurd legal complexities, besides gay marriage is either right or wrong dependent upon the legal and moral principles of the nation, why the half measures?

I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.

At 5/13/2010 6:13:43 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:like the one muhammed ran???

If he were to rule in a country today, it would be the best one in the world. If only we had a leader somewhat similar to him. But we do not. We have too many wealth-hungry, power-hungry hypocrites, unfortunately.

At 5/13/2010 6:13:43 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:like the one muhammed ran???

If he were to rule in a country today, it would be the best one in the world. If only we had a leader somewhat similar to him. But we do not. We have too many wealth-hungry, power-hungry hypocrites, unfortunately.

my point was that he was theocratic...

why do you always feel the need to jump in on other people's posts to discuss your personal feelings of Islam on things not related to what the person was saying, Mirza???

lol :)

"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."

At 5/13/2010 6:56:57 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:my point was that he was theocratic...

why do you always feel the need to jump in on other people's posts to discuss your personal feelings of Islam on things not related to what the person was saying, Mirza???

lol :)

Look at all topics and see who started it. The one with atheists being majority, not me. This one, not me. There are tons. Theocracy is coming to question in a bad way, the beloved Prophet is being mentioned alongside that and naturally, I defend. It is not personal feelings. It is true that he would be the best leader and make the best nation. Adolf Hitler ruined a country, but people still like him for what he managed to achieve. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) achieved more positive things than all leaders born after him combined.

At 5/13/2010 6:13:43 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:like the one muhammed ran???

If he were to rule in a country today, it would be the best one in the world. If only we had a leader somewhat similar to him. But we do not. We have too many wealth-hungry, power-hungry hypocrites, unfortunately.

my point was that he was theocratic...

why do you always feel the need to jump in on other people's posts to discuss your personal feelings of Islam on things not related to what the person was saying, Mirza???

lol :)

Well, to be fair, it seems like you have a slight obssession with Muhammad.

At 5/13/2010 6:56:57 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:my point was that he was theocratic...

why do you always feel the need to jump in on other people's posts to discuss your personal feelings of Islam on things not related to what the person was saying, Mirza???

lol :)

Look at all topics and see who started it. The one with atheists being majority, not me. This one, not me. There are tons. Theocracy is coming to question in a bad way, the beloved Prophet is being mentioned alongside that and naturally, I defend. It is not personal feelings. It is true that he would be the best leader and make the best nation. Adolf Hitler ruined a country, but people still like him for what he managed to achieve. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) achieved more positive things than all leaders born after him combined.

yep... he sure did order the stoning of enough evil adulterers...

"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."

At 5/13/2010 6:50:56 AM, Mirza wrote:The definition of marriage applied to the bond between a man and a woman. If you do not like it, do not try to change it.

Who says? Certain Native American tribes recognised same gender marriage and inter-gender marriage between six differing genders. A number of african tribes permit same sex female marriage.

Why does marriage even matter for homosexuals? Is it not just another religious nonsense to most of them?

You are ignoring the existence of secular marriage. Marriage enables certain rights, that otherwise would not be possible. Say you have two men in a committed relationship, that have lived together for 57 years. Man A is in a terrible accident, by the time man B arrives at the hospital Man A's estranged son has already authorised the turning off of the life support machine, has already put his fathers jewelry on ebay, and is refusing to let Man B enter the hospital room because he is not family.

And there is no issue of equality here. They are allowed to marry, just not people of their own sex. It is still equal to a very high level.

Semantics.They don't want to marry people of the opposite sex, for them that is meaningless. They don't want equality to a very high level, they want full actual equality. You see homosexuals suffer from the same problem women do, for some bizarre mental aberration they insist on regarding themselves as human beings.

I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.

At 5/12/2010 9:45:18 PM, Freeman wrote:In particular, these legal actions are being opposed by the Catholic Church - that misogynistic, homophobic, sadistic, xenophobic, jingoistic, sectarian, languorous child raping engine of bigotry and ignorance that dares to presume moral enlightenment.

Shhhh! Don't say that! My Catholic friend could be reading this... Ok, she's not, but good move on Portugal's part. Probably much to the surprise of many people I am pro-gay marriage.

How do you reconcile that with Islam?

Separation of church and state. :) Theocracies = big problem.

That is a difficult position to take, especially within Islam. You deserve a round of applause.

more like she deserves a chance to explain her position.

I understood it.

I think somethings gotta give.... either islam... or her anti-theocracy.

unless she's more of an anarchist... and just wants everybody to follow God's LAW themselves... (meaning YOU should be Beheading 'opposers' yourself)

Do you not understand the concept of the seperation of Church and State?

I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.

At 5/13/2010 7:01:31 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:yep... he sure did order the stoning of enough evil adulterers...

At least people can have healthy marriages that way. They do not fear being divorced, or their partners visiting this pro-adultery side.

Gay marriage would not be permitted either. Laws should not be changed due to feelings, but logic.

I'd rather live as a free man, even with the risk of my wife cheating on me, than under the tyranny you propose, in addition there is no logical reason to deny same sex marriage.

I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.

and I know buddha said something like don't listen to what I say unless it agrees with your own common sense... but the RELIGION of buddhism CERTAINLY makes THE BUDDHA out to be a majestic figure to be revered/followed.

"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."